Telangana High Court
WP/30301/2025 of G. Surendar Goud Vs The State of Telangana, on 7 October 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 30301 OF 2025 Between: G. Surendar Goud, S/o License holder Rl/o. H. District.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 30301 OF 2025
Between:
G. Surendar Goud, S/o
License holder Rl/o. H.
District.
Papanna Goud, aged about 50 years, occ. Taper and TFT
No. 1-32, Ranipeta village, Kothakota Mandal, Wanaparthy
.....PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Wanaparthy District, Wanaparthy
3. G. Sai Kiran, S/o. G. Rajanna Goud, Aged aboul2T years, Occ. Taper and TFT License Holder, Fl/o. Ranipeta village, Kothakota Mandal, Wanaparthy District.
....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the impugned cancellation order dated 24-09-2025 in tile Rc. No. C/095i2025 cancelling the TFT
License of the petitioner at Counter No.1 of Ranipeta village, Kothakota Mandal, Wanaparthy District on the false complaint of the 3rd respondent who is also one of the TFT License holder in the village, as illegal, unlawful and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to continue the TFT License of the petitioner at Counter No.1 in the above village.
l.A.NO:1 OF 2025
Petition Under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the cirt rmstances stated in the affidavit fited in support of the petition, the High court rnay be pleased to suspend the opera.ion of the impugned cancellation ord: datec 24-09-2025
issued by the 2nd r:spondent in file RC. No. C/095/2025 b) continuing the TFT
License of the peti.ioner vide License No. KKT/09/2007 C t dated o2l11l2oo7
which is renewed u tto date at Ranipeta village, Kothakota I landa', wanaparthy District, pending disposal of main writ petition- Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.DAMODAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : SRI L.RAVINDER, 3 '] FOR
PROHIBITION AND EXCISE
Counsel for the ResPondent No.3 : --
The Court made the following ORDER
THE HON'I}LE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PBTITION No.30301 OF 2025
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heald Sri M.Darnodal I{cddy. lcarnecl Counsel lbr thc petitioner and Sli L.Ravinder, learrlccl Assistant Govetntnent l'leader for Revcnuc
2. Petitioncr flled thc present rvrit pctition challenging thc irnpugnecl proceedings dated 2'1.09.2025 ol lcspondent No'2. Vile thc albresaitl proceeclirrgs, t'espouclent No.2 cancclled the liccnse of the petitioncl under Section i I ( I Xb) of tlre T'clangana Excise Act, 1968. It is an appealable order itr terLls o1'Scction 63(l) of the Tclangana lixcise Act. lt)68. Thcy ha\re to pref'er an appeal in terms of Section l(r( I ) ol thc Act,2001 bclole the Appellate Authority'
3. Thelc is no disputc with rcgard to the legal position that under the fbltowing three exccptioual circlttnstances though an alternative remedy is availablc, the writ petition is rnaintainable. The said three circumstances are as tb llorvs:- i. A breach ol'lundamental rigltts; ii. A violatiorr of the principles olnatural justice; Iu
4. '['hc sa id principlc rt,as also laid dow'n b1,' t : tliree .ludgc ./\n cxcess of -iurisdiction; ol a challengr' o lllc |ire.s of tirc \tatute or dclcgatcd lcgislation. llcnch ol the Apex Coun in Asst. (lonrntissioner ()r Stntc l'ar v. Comrnercial S(ccl Limitctlr and also Whirlpool l. rrporation r'. Rcgistrar of 'f rnde Marks, Nlumbair. Whcreas, thr, tcse tlt casc. is llot Ihlling in an1, of thc alirr-esaicl tltt'cc crtegorics ltcr-cltrrc, thc 1'rctitionel her:iu cannot cotttcud that though tliere i. rirt al crtrativc l'hcte at'e se v,:ral l-actual aspccts ri hicli this Coutl clttr oI cittrsicler itr a petition lil:d under Articlc 226 ol- thc C--onstrt r Ion c I India 'l'hcrclore, thir; writ petition is not rraiLrtainable arrcl cffrcacious remedy, thc prcscut n,ril pctition is rrtitttrtaitrablc
5. ln the light of thc sanrc, this Writ Petitior s .lnurissed llowever, Iibc rly is granted to the petitioncr to trle i r apl)crl undcr Scction 63( l) ol thc Excisc Act. cha[lenging the i r pugncd ot'dct dated 24.09.2)25 and raisc all the gtor.rttds attd cott, rtti,-rns. rl'hich thcy lrave rairie(l in thc prescnt Writ Pctition, belorl Lhc Appcllate I Nlanu/S C/()80 I /202 I
1t oos y rt scc
J Authority, and it is lor thc Appellate Authority to consiclcr thc same' On filing of such appeal. Appellatc Authority shalt dispose o[ the same iu accordaticc u'ith la"r' Miscellaneous applications, if any pcnding' shall stancl closed There shall be no order as to costs SD P. PONNA KRISHN S TANT REGI //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To
Two CCs to GP FOR PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] h Court for the State
2. One CC to SRI M.DAIVODAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CD Copies SA LS a
HIGH COURT DATED:0711012025
ORDER
WP.No.30301 of 2025 DISMISSING THE W.P : .1\ (? * I 2tl sia t-t: [[i
., Spt.,T '(j.(' ) ) .,.
a- (; WITHOUT COSTS.